Chapter 3

Who Benefits From The Controlled Substance Act?

The purpose of this post is to expand on Michelle Alexanders analysis of the prison system in American, and the negative incentives that perpetuate social injustice. As it turns out, some of the countries biggest and wealthiest organizations or unions benefit from the illegality of marijuana and other drugs, creating a web of money and power that takes little account for the publics best interest. The Controlled Substance Act is often marketed as a humanitarian act, a barrier that prevents the unraveling of our moral framework. But one has only to implement a simple Google search and it becomes evident that, like nearly everything else in American politics, there exist profound financial incentives behind the prohibition of specific substances. This conflict of interest between the prevailing trends of American culture and the industries that fund its governance has given rise to aggressive political agendas that are tailored to the specifics of the latter.

The four decades of schedule 1 drug prohibition have presented several special interest groups with unique opportunities for significant monetary gains. What is particularly disconcerting is that leading proponents for prohibition are the police unions. This is an immediate red flag because the humanitarian air with which they address the public is merely a facade for their aggressive attempts to bolster federal funding. Take John Lovell for example, who was hired in 2009 as a police lobbyist to help battle the ballot initiative, Prop 19, that would legalize marijuana and ultimately and generate millions in tax revenue for the state of California. Following the death of Prop 19: Lovell went on to represent the California police unions in both the Marijuana Suppression Program and the Campaign against Marijuana Planting. His lobbying techniques subsequently reallocated $9.7 million of federal money into the war on drugs. Lovell benefited from over $300,000 in cash payouts from various police unions in return for his successful lobbying techniques. The rest of the federal money was presumably used for the purchase of new equipment and training new law enforcement personnel. All of this, for the sake continuing the war on pot cultivation and consumption, a war that over 65% of Americans have deemed a failure in recent polls. Through the actions of the Californian police unions and John Lovell, it is becoming glaringly obvious that the war on drugs is being exploited to garner excessive financial resources. Rather, the local police and respective lobbyist have manufactured an efficient method for exploiting the federal government and American taxpayers.

            The local police agencies are not the only federally funded beneficiaries of the Controlled Substance Act. The Drug Enforcement Administration is nearing its fourth decade in service and has grown to exceed 5000 active federal agents with an annual budget of nearly $2.5 Billion. As far as its commitment to the war on drugs, in 2005 alone, the DEA seized $1.4 billion in drug related assets and $477 million worth of illegal narcotics. At first glance this seems significant but when compared with the total percentage we manage to stop that I stated earlier, it is clear that we are over funding a losing battle.  

As Michelle Alexander makes clear at the start of chapter two, the prison industry is a business first and a correction facility second. Very little correction is in fact garnered under these conditions, which is a perfectly logical business model if the prisoners also serve as your source of income. The Correction Corporation of America (CCA) is the world’s largest private prison company and manages over 60 facilities nationwide. Many of the 90,000 inmates housed in these prisons were involved in low-level drug crimes, and each CCA facility contains its own substance rehabilitation center. If the conflict of interests is not glaringly apparent, I don’t know what is. It is for this very reason that throughout the last two decades, the CCA has dished out over $18 million lobbying for even more restrictive drug and immigration laws. The private prison industries’ reliance on the small time offender is so significant; it has become an active component of their public business strategy.

The following is an excerpt taken from their 2010 report to shareholders. “The demand for our facilities and services could be adversely affected by the relaxation of enforcement efforts, leniency in conviction or parole standards and sentencing practices or through the decriminalization of certain activities that are currently proscribed by our criminal laws,” This statement alone sheds light on two prevailing truths associated with the drug laws. The first is that they are good for business, regardless of the impact this has on the rights of the American people. The second is the extent to which these incentives influence the policy that is drafted by our elected officials. At present, the war on drugs has stimulated the growth of a for profit correction industry that aggressively influences legislative procedure through monetary compensation. It does this in an attempt to maximize convictions, and retain current inmates, neither of which is a legitimate attempt to combat drug trafficking or help fight addiction. If you are thinking to yourself, “shouldn’t that be the goal of the any correction facility?” you are correct, but that would be bad for business.

The influence of pharmaceutical giants such as Johnson & Johnson and Bristol Meyers Squib on the political agenda of elected officials is vast. This is particularly the case in relation to substance control, most notably, marijuana. Next to the police unions, big PhARM is the second largest opponent of marijuana legalization on Capitol Hill. The reason for this is purely economical: as a plant, the production of marijuana cannot be patented. This drastically undermines the incentives for production, as the potential for competition would be vast. Although the medicinal application of marijuana is under funded many pharmaceuticals fear that its legalization would drastically undermine the market for common pain medication such as Advil or Vicodin. Lacking sufficient incentives for production, marijuana has thus been condemned as a threat to the business of drug manufacturers nationwide. It is for this reason that the pursuit of further medicinal application continues to go unfunded. This will be the case for as long as the Controlled Substance Act holds precedent; because lobbying for further substance prohibition as opposed to allowing further competition is the most lucrative business strategy.

Well, Im getting tired, but let us not forget the more consumer driven side to those fighting drug (specifically marijuana legalization) Drug cartels (they would lose business), paper makers (hemp is a worthy competitor) and cigarette manufactures (who also view it as a threat to business) 

American Prisons, A Bandaid Over A Broken System

It is beyond contention that the growth of poverty, crime, violence and incarceration rates within predominantly black and latino inner city communities is perpetuated by biased drug laws, a negatively incentivized police force, and the prison industrial complex. These three forces combined are hugely responsible for the spike in prison construction and incarceration rates, followed by the systematic disenfranchisement of low class American citizens, specifically black and brown men. For those unaware of the corruption and prejudice surrounding these issues, the illusion of safety that the police and prison industry go to great lengths to maintain is graciously embraced. As I see it, this outlook (one taken by a huge percentage of the American populous) is the true root of the problem. These people are more than willing to dish out millions annually for the construction, staffing, maintenance, and expansion of crime fighting agencies and corrections facilities. This to them seems the appropriate and logical response and use of funds, they are paying for a service that insures their relative safety despite the fact that this very same system has proven to exacerbate poverty, crime, and violence in the long run. Like placing a bandaid over a ruptured artery, these tax payers and politicians alike having nothing but the short term in mind, and it is this outlook that has infected our entire outlook on policy and governance. Ask them to instead allocate an equivalent amount of energy, time, and resources to the education of urban teens and the strengthening of inner city infrastructure and they immediately throw their hands up in protest. To them this strategy is unfair, and those benefitting from it are undeserving or others hand outs. The tax payers would rather have they illusion of their tax dollars being utilized exclusively in their best interest then to fund a productive, community based, restorative project. This classic aggressive stance against perceived socialism or affirmative action has plagued America for its entire existence. So many are convinced that you only deserve what you can pay for, but they never stop to think about the historical and systematic consequences that led to their wealth or others poverty. If we are going to fix this country, we need to start with values and policies by which we appropriate resources and services. An excellent model for this is self-made millionaire Harris Rosen, who adopted a Florida neighborhood called Tangelo Park, cut the crime rate in half, and increased the high school graudation rate from 25% to 100% by giving everyone free daycare and all high school graduates scholarships. Here is a link further detailing his work and philosophy... http://pegasus.ucf.edu/story/rosen/ 

Assumptions

It was a beautiful mid-summers night in 2010 when I was arrested for Marijuana possession. I had attended a house party a few miles outside of Princeton in a small suburban community which was part of West Windsor township, known for its predominantly white, well off, suburbanites and top tier public schools. The party itself was nothing to brag about, more like a collection of twenty or so recent high school graduates drinking cheap beer and listening to old school hip-hop. It was nearly 3:00am when a few of us excused ourselves to indulge in some recreational pot smoking. Without hesitation we piled into Jason's Jeep which was parked on the street, after all, why would the police be patrolling suburbia at such an hour on a weeknight? No more than ten minutes later we were being blinded by the floodlights of a cruiser, who had rounded the corner only to find a parked green Jeep filled with smoke and six wide eyed boys. My initial assumption was that the party had been reported to the police by the neighbors, but not until later would we learn that it was merely bad luck this particular officer had driven by when he did.

He got out of the cruiser and without using his megaphone or issuing a single threat he approached the car and instructed us to exit the vehicle slowly and place our hands on the hood. Noticing he was both older and alone, I popped open the passenger door and took off down a side street, cleared a fence and didn't look back. Two hours and five miles later, I was being politely questioned and eventually handcuffed in my mothers driveway... turns out they had my name the whole time. When I got to the station I had my mugshot taken, and then instead of being thrown in a holding cell I was placed in the lobby where I waited on my mothers arrival, the whole time laughing about the previous nights shenanigans with a young officer as he processed our information.

Not once during this whole ordeal did it cross my mind that I was benefitting from my whiteness. But upon reflection it became painfully obvious that had I been black or Hispanic, the events of that night would have likely unfolded quite differently, much in the same way Tim Wises experience at the Republican National Convention would have differed had he been colored. For one, the officer who stumbled upon me and my friends in the first place would almost certainly not have calmly approached the car in the way he did. But that is white privilege, even when breaking the law we were deemed unthreatening and even deserving of respect. The same holds true for the officers who waited for me at my house, they were polite in their questioning, I wasn't subjected to a search, and they even apologized when they put me in handcuffs. The fact that none whom were caught were placed in a holding cell is just the cherry on top of the white privilege cake.

This phenomenon was even more drastically apparent during the resulting legal proceedings. Despite being charge initially with eluding (which is a felony) on top of the drug charges, my case was sent from district court right back to the West Windsor judge almost immediately. I was told by my lawyer that the judge in Trenton had only briefly scanned my file before writing my case off as trivial. As I left the building my lawyer looked at me and said "Its a good thing you aren't from Trenton" which was an obscure way of saying, "its a good thing you are white, well off, educated, and heading off to college, otherwise you would probably be looking at jail time." Back in the West Windsor courtroom things were being sugar coated even less. My lawyer, who knew the judge personally, had a brief one on one conversation with the judge before the proceedings began. Then, we my case was called, I was given told that the eluding and drug charges had been replaced with a noise ordinance. The judge lectured me on personal responsibly for about five minutes, saying that I have a lot going for me and I shouldn't jeopardize those opportunities by doing drugs. I was given a year and a half of probation, after which my entire personal record would be wiped clean.

While it has been clear to me for some time now that the final ruling of my case was very likely correlated with my skin color and social class. It took me a lot longer to realize that my treatment throughout the whole experience was as well. Being white in my case meant that I could be arrested processed, and tried, while not once being brutalized, disrespected, or deemed a threat.